DHURU NARAIN SHUKLA v. MR. SHASHANK TRIPATHI DISTT. MAGISTRATE DISTT BARABANKI AND ANOTHER
CAPL/1332/2025 · 2025-05-02
Rajeev Singh
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137622 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 137622 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25381
Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 1332 of 2025 Applicant :- Dhuru Narain Shukla Opposite Party :- Mr. Shashank Tripathi Distt. Magistrate Distt Barabanki And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kumar Singh,Pawan Kumar Sharma Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
2. The present contempt application is filed with the prayer to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of order dated 30.1.2025 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ C No.830 of 2025, Dhuru Narain Shukla Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that land of the applicant was being utilized in public purpose but the compensation was not being paid, then Writ C No.830/2025 was filed by the applicant, which was entertained by this Court and
order was passed that pleadings be exchanged between the parties within six weeks, it was also observed that in the meantime, if any land has already been utilized or encroached without paying compensation/sale consideration then opposite parties shall be made liable for the same, therefore, if there is any compensation or sale
consideration payable to the applicant then the same should be cleared as per law before the next date otherwise serious consequences will follow but till today, no compensation has been paid, therefore, respondents may be summoned and punished accordingly.
4. It is evident that by way of order dated 20.3.2006, Case No.20/2005, under Section 41 of the Land Revenue Act was decided, in which, it was observed that on the spot, the land in question was found less than the area mentioned in the revenue record, therefore, compensation could not be paid. In such circumstances, when there is a disputed question of fact, then contempt proceeding cannot be initiated, therefore,
contempt application is misconceived and is accordingly, dismissed.
5. However, it is open to the applicant to pursue the pending writ petition.
Order Date :- 2.5.2025 GauraV/- Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench